use docker manifest create inside beta push

[Zoey2936]

No description provided.

[Zoey2936]

If it works, this command: curl -H "Authorization: Bearer $(curl "https://auth.docker.io/token?service=registry.docker.io&scope=repository:nextcloud/all-in-one:pull" -s | jq -r .token)" -H "Accept: application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json" https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/nextcloud/all-in-one/manifests/beta-arm64 -Is | grep docker-content-digest should have an output

[Zoey2936]

Or we make the arm64 tag also multiarch, that should work guaranteed

[Zoey2936]

@szaimen what is your opinion?

[szaimen]

@szaimen what is your opinion?

The PR looks good to me. Can you also do the same in the publish to latest workflow or did you want to do it in a follow-up?

[Zoey2936]

@szaimen what is your opinion?

The PR looks good to me. Can you also do the same in the publish to latest workflow or did you want to do it in a follow-up?

It won't work like this in the latest workflow, since manifest create works only with manifests and not manifest list currently (docker/cli#3994)

[szaimen]

only with manifests and not manifest list

Okay but I thought the goal was to retreive a application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json on beta-arm64 after this PR so that should be fine? Or do I misunderstand something?

[Zoey2936]

we build images with the application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json manifest
inside beta they get converted to application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json and application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.list.v2+json
and latest copies them

[szaimen]

Ah I see. So it should work even without touchin the publish to latest workflow?

[Zoey2936]

I think yes

[szaimen]

Okay, thanks! We'll see then :)

[Zoey2936]

seems to work

[szaimen]

Great 🎉

[Zoey2936]

But another question, what if a person migrates their AIO instance from arm64 to amd64, while keeping the compose file which contains the latest-amr64 tag, what will happen to clamav, all other containers should work (now)?

[szaimen]

what will happen to clamav

clamav should then be shown as available since the internal logic relies on the used architecture:

https://github.com/nextcloud/all-in-one/blob/f1dff9b3e29fa8b6f9eadef00900027aaa478d2e/php/src/Data/ConfigurationManager.php#L128

[Zoey2936]

but there is no nextcloud/aio-clamav:latest-arm64 image? or would it pull nextcloud/aio-clamav:latest?

[szaimen]

nextcloud/aio-clamav:latest-arm64

Ah right. You would need to switch to the correct tag in that case...

[szaimen]

But you would notice this since it would fail to download that tag of the clamav image since it doesnt exist.

[Zoey2936]

So the mastercontainer will throw errors?
I know that this is very unrealistic, but should there maybe be a logic that disallows clamav even if the -arm64 tag is used, or should we push clamav also to the arm64 tag, even if it is amd64 only? Or are my thoughts unnecessary?

[szaimen]

So the mastercontainer will throw errors?

The mastercontainer will indeed throw errors.

I know that this is very unrealistic, but should there maybe be a logic that disallows clamav even if the -arm64 tag is used, or should we push clamav also to the arm64 tag, even if it is amd64 only? Or are my thoughts unnecessary?

I hope that if people should experience this will open a ticket about this and then we should be able to help them pretty easily. I don't think this should happen often since hopefully people use the correct tag on the server instead of re-using the old one.